Has ASEAN become Marginalized within Regional Security Architecture?
South Asian leaders continue to reiterate how “central” ASEAN is to the region’s security architecture. However, in practice, the tendency is to prioritize bilateral agreements, gradually marginalizing the organization. This fragmentation is weakening regional cooperation, accentuating divisions, and compromising stability in the context of growing tensions in the Indo-Pacific. These trends are worrying at a time when Sino-American rivalries are becoming more acute.
The global competition between China and the United States is particularly evident in Southeast Asia in the area of security. In this maritime and continental space located at the confluence of the Indian and Pacific Oceans, their competing strategies shape the regional environment in at least two ways. On the one hand, the actions of Beijing and Washington directly affect the sovereignty and security of coastal states, particularly in the South China Sea, where China is deploying a range of hybrid actions—occupation and reclamation of islets, harassment of fishermen and coast guards from other nations, cyberattacks and information operations—to which Washington responds by increasing freedom of navigation operations and other naval exercises. On the other hand, both China and the United States are investing in deepened security partnerships, which are vectors of their regional influence.
Faced with the effects of Sino-American rivalry, Southeast Asian states are in turn developing defense strategies and policies aimed at protecting themselves and promoting their interests, while at the same time prompting a redefinition of the regional security architecture (RSA). The latter can be broadly divided into three systems: bilateral and minilateral cooperation frameworks serving an operational purpose; partnerships with the United States, perceived by most neighboring countries as guarantors of regional stability and therefore deserving of special attention; and finally, a juxtaposition of multilateral forums organized around the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). These forums are designed as spaces for regional cooperation and socialization, intended to facilitate adherence to a set of norms, enable the emergence of common strategic perceptions and, above all, dilute the influence of extra-regional powers such as China, the United States, India and Japan within a broader group under the leadership of the association. [...]
Juliette Loesch is associate research fellow at Ifri's Center for Asian Studies.
This article is available only in French and has been published in Politique étrangère, Vol. 90, No. 4, 2025.
Available in:
Themes and regions
Share
Author(s)
Juliette LOESCH
Associate Research Fellow, Center for Asian Studies, Ifri
Find out more
Discover all our analyses
2029, the Great Asian Renaissance
Asians were dominated and sometimes humiliated by Westerners during the last two centuries. Today, they look to the future with confidence. In 2050, the world’s two leading powers are likely to be China and India. The great Asian Renaissance will lead to geopolitical upheavals. China-US tensions are already visible and conflicts may emerge between Asian powers. Yet the clash of civilizations is not inevitable.
Between the Lines of Questionable Battles
This article was published in Politique étrangère in 1979, the year the French Institute of International Relations (Ifri) was founded. In it, Raymond Aron reviews important events of the previous decade, such as the Vietnam War. He particularly reflects on the place of law, morality, force and national interest in international relations. Related topics, like the right to intervene and the responsibility to protect, are implicitly included in this article.
A Vibrant and Flexible Alliance
NATO has proved its renewed usefulness and is today fully engaged, well beyond its former frontiers, wherever its interests and those of its members are threatened.
NATO: From Washington (1949) to Strasbourg/Kehl (2009)
The Alliance cannot avoid a strategic debate about its role, missions and resources. This may be painful, but it will ensure clarity and prepare the Alliance for future challenges.